From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 338EEC432C0 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:01:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00AB520674 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:01:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=osandov-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@osandov-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="Bw6IaVzA" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726466AbfLCSBT (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 13:01:19 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-f194.google.com ([209.85.210.194]:46067 "EHLO mail-pf1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726057AbfLCSBS (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Dec 2019 13:01:18 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-f194.google.com with SMTP id 2so2206240pfg.12 for ; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 10:01:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=osandov-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=54Sa2FMo9AOiRwAQTSG4qVcNG3E4YpB88X4kv1LkOjc=; b=Bw6IaVzATr+h/x2AnMJ98YtBvRF78SZ6U61Qf36WZgSiFZDkw5egKyMFoRFZHOfr6o hPCFnW7CsWywQktb4phxMv6EVoOTK7cw9nYzkrii2c4dAJB+SY+w+WspUBbhbiKb1V7V 7MU3Xtkm2jEOzvO9jNo9Shted6DumdGU8eQ4lcAVR7k6BI/XJEe3Y44BUojzGK3XlcTV q7epOEGpspV/z80sYEsdgY6M4WeYrvQOGX9CQBa0MP2rM+aVdBv0Pi6qwD7xtmLomlkN j+G4MPZjcq4NY8ynzPhrNZP/D72nZ9tSlThCLqogY2uf1LlMmAOa8R/AQE29pwwuSdhv RPug== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=54Sa2FMo9AOiRwAQTSG4qVcNG3E4YpB88X4kv1LkOjc=; b=LQt5FjSqd4/VA/7Z31X1DK4nNHEwF6xBjVXv5uBMfLec8bTlyLdbddwhEhap561Esr PUPWLFVVYwfrn3xTiyuhR3lLyrSWluIH9vhR1D9U4hjqoasvvxFT2exMxiEdfaKwtoAm QfY8jlJ3ZpFxou8yS/LwNT749a+BVciZsR21T/JZm+MM2lg+95y1upPq0b33axq+R14O TeQxFzx731tRV+TEeBkj1XiSXEn/YU8IWIbGFt2NccKJ2/Skq4gPJahpF+AdBR27A3Pf IUjFD51yyeS6JzKVpjXenn9dVOniE96JoTPYg7PSJeoseMtoA6fQy8g/SqHjQFRHd1C7 a3sg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUiZsMDx6S3HPg5xozlSjqyuZcee6gbgoOjXHwPCBUVi6RW+NZz CI49vk8AcSiSm9N1bOOyzMkz7g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyi/FtQFHzvotkbDAZxOEgM4dh1F3O2o8dTsOO//76zv2J2oPVUiyfuvsrF7VCkk0daEngKdQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:770c:: with SMTP id s12mr6960232pgc.25.1575396076879; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 10:01:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from vader ([2620:10d:c090:200::3:c979]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o12sm3759366pjf.19.2019.12.03.10.01.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 03 Dec 2019 10:01:16 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:01:13 -0800 From: Omar Sandoval To: Johannes Thumshirn Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] btrfs: remove struct find_free_extent.ram_bytes Message-ID: <20191203180113.GA831548@vader> References: <20191203132713.GI21721@Johanness-MacBook-Pro.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20191203132713.GI21721@Johanness-MacBook-Pro.local> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 03, 2019 at 02:27:13PM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On Mon, Dec 02, 2019 at 05:34:25PM -0800, Omar Sandoval wrote: > > From: Omar Sandoval > > > > This hasn't been used since it was first introduced in commit > > b4bd745d1230 ("btrfs: Introduce find_free_extent_ctl structure for later > > rework"). > > > > Signed-off-by: Omar Sandoval > > --- > > fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c | 2 -- > > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c > > index 18df434bfe52..40c000269232 100644 > > --- a/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c > > @@ -3437,7 +3437,6 @@ btrfs_release_block_group(struct btrfs_block_group *cache, > > */ > > struct find_free_extent_ctl { > > /* Basic allocation info */ > > - u64 ram_bytes; > > u64 num_bytes; > > u64 empty_size; > > u64 flags; > > @@ -3809,7 +3808,6 @@ static noinline int find_free_extent(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, > > > > WARN_ON(num_bytes < fs_info->sectorsize); > > > > - ffe_ctl.ram_bytes = ram_bytes; > > ffe_ctl.num_bytes = num_bytes; > > ffe_ctl.empty_size = empty_size; > > ffe_ctl.flags = flags; > > Either that or pass in a find_free_extent_ctl to btrfs_add_reserved_bytes() as > ram_bytes, num_bytes and delalloc are set in ffe_ctl. I personally would > favour passing in ffe_ctl to btrfs_add_reserved_bytes() as well as others like > btrfs_add_free_space(), btrfs_free_reserved_bytes() and so on. That might be more convenient but it feels a little icky and layer violating to me. It'd be nice to keep the space_info code separate from find_free_extent.